How the U.S. Aristocracy Made a Foreign-Policy Chump Out of Trump

In order to understand Donald Trump’s foreign policies, a person must be totally open-minded to at least the possibility that the U.S. is the world’s most aggressive, war-mongering nation, so that when an international poll was taken of the publics in 65 nations in 2013 as to which country is “the greatest threat to peace in the world today”, the 67,806 respondents were correct to place the United States as being overwhelmingly in that position, “the greatest threat to peace in the world today” — far ahead of any other nation.

In other words: to understand Trump’s foreign policies, one must first recognize the reality of the broader background. There is, indeed, a very dark reality about the United States that is covered-up in virtually all ‘histories’ about this country except for the Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick masterpiece, Untold History of the United States. (See Chapter One here, and Chapter Two here.) One must be willing to get beyond the myths about America’s benevolence and ‘support of democracy around the world’, in order to understand this President’s foreign policy. After all, any American President is part of a tradition — and it goes beyond partisanship: there are some important things (especially in foreign policy) that both the Democratic Party (“liberal”) Establishment and the Republican Party (“conservative”) Establishment share.

For example: the Democrat Barack Obama did terrible things to Libya and Syria, and the Republican George W. Bush did terrible things to Iraq and Afghanistan. (And, before Bush, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter started the radicalization of Afghanistan in order to weaken the Soviet Union. And what did LBJ and Nixon do to Vietnam and Laos? And to Chile. And to Argentina? And what did Eisenhower do to Iran, and to Guatemala? It goes on, and on, after World War II and the leadership by America’s last great President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.)

The reality about post-World-War-One America (except when FDR was President) is the opposite of the benevolent myth: it’s the nonstop control of this country by an increasingly voracious aristocracy, who destroy other nations and have utter disregard for those peoples’ welfare, and no real concern even for the American public (except as cannon-fodder for their conquests — and as taxpayers to pay for these foreign operations, too).

If the very possibility of this — of a voracious U.S. aristocracy — is peremptorily denied, then a truthful understanding of President Trump’s foreign polices will be impossible, and there would be no point in seeing the evidence that will be presented here, which is consistent with this broader history, and, according to which history, Trump is simply the latest incarnation of that deeper reality.

Specifically, the reality, I shall argue here, is as follows: The same people who were behind the George W. Bush regime’s 2003 invasion of Iraq, are behind Donald Trump’s planned regime-change-in-Iran policy. And this fact says a lot about Trump’s self-claims to having known in advance that Bush’s invasion of Iraq was based on lies. Trump’s claim there is a lie: he did not know in advance, about Bush’s lying, and he’s even being fooled now by the same people who sold invading Iraq; they’ve sold him, now, on a U.S. or Israeli or Saudi invasion of Iran; only the pretext for that invasion is lacking.

Their ultimate goal is conquering Russia — the world’s most resource-rich country. Psychopathic, crazy, but true: that’s the way they are. (It used to be called “imperialists” but now it’s called “neoconservatives.”)

Defeating Russia’s ally Iran is now key to this broader plan — the aristocracy’s wedge to weaken Russia further, without directly attacking Russia itself, yet. Instead of (like Obama) going simultaneously after Russia and three heads-of-state who are friendly toward Russia — Libya’s Gaddafi, Ukraine’s Yanukovych, and Syria’s Assad — they’re settling, right now, merely on overthrowing just one specific Moscow-friendly leader: the leader of Iran (that’s currently Hassan Rouhani, but also even above him, the Shiite clergy who determine who can and can’t run in Iran’s elections). Mattis, Flynn (until he was fired), Bannon, Pompeo, and perhaps even Trump himself, favor this: conquest of Iran. But like with Obama’s Presidency, there might even be multiple targets soon: especially, the Trump team has also been belligerent against China (another traditional American target after China had been a U.S. ally during the world war against fascism. On which side is the U.S., now — for, or against, fascism? Why isn’t that question even being debated in America? It should be, if the answer to it might explain today’s “perpetual war” — which is so profitable for the owners of firms such as Lockheed Martin, and so disastrous for the rest of the world, including even the American public.)

THE CASE

Anyone who was watching television news shows during the buildup to the catastrophic U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 remembers the many ‘experts’ who were speaking, and from whom the ‘news’media were publishing editorials, about how horrible Saddam Hussein was, and how much safer the American public would be if there were to be “regime change in Iraq.” Those propagandists never apologized, not even after the trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dead and injured that resulted from their and George W. Bush’s and the rest of the U.S. Establishment’s invasion there had produced an utterly destroyed country in Iraq, and so much PTSD etc. here in America — all on the basis of Bush’s lies. The result for Iraqis was vastly worse than it was for Americans: As I headlined on 29 September 2015, “GALLUP: ‘Iraqis Are the Saddest & One of the Angriest Populations in the World’.” The people who should be feeling guilty about that are not the U.S. troops who did what they were told and had been throughly lied to, but instead are the U.S. aristocracy and their paid agents in the think-tanks and ‘news’ media and government, who fooled the public into supporting that horrendous invasion.

A good example of such paid agents (propagandists for such evils) are Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution, who shilled shamelessly for the Iraq invasion, and yet continued to be invited onto news shows etc., as ‘experts’, even after the general public came to realize that they’d been fooled into supporting the invasion (on the basis of those individuals’ lies and distortions). Why do people still watch those channels, and subscribe to those ‘news’papers and cable-‘news’ channels and magazines, etc.? But it seems that Trump himself does. And he’s also surrounded by people who are doing it, very assiduously.

The People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iranor the Mojahedin-e Khalq … is an Iranianleftist political–militant[5]in exile that advocates a violent overthrow of the government of Iranwhile claiming itself as the replacing shadow government.[28][29]The group has no popular base of support inside Iran, but maintains a presence by acting as a proxyagainst Tehran.[30]

An official in U.S. President Donald Trump’s Cabinet and at least one of his advisers gave paid speeches to organizations linked to an Iranian exile group that killed Americans before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, ran donation scams and saw its members set themselves on fire over the arrest of their leader.

Elaine Chao [Mitch McConnell’s wife], confirmed this week as Trump’s transportation secretary, received $50,000 in 2015 for a five-minute speech to the political wing of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, previously called a “cult-like” terrorist group by the State Department. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani also was paid an unknown sum to talk to the group, known as the MEK.

More than two dozen former U.S. officials, both Republican and Democratic, have spoken before the MEK, including former House Speaker and Trump adviser Newt Gingrich. Some have publicly acknowledged being paid, but others have not.

While nothing would have prohibited the paid speeches, they raise questions about what influence the exiles may have in the new administration.

Already, a group of former U.S. officials, including Giuliani, wrote a letter to Trump last month encouraging him to “establish a dialogue” with the MEK’s political arm. With Trump’s ban on Iranians entering the U.S., his administration’s call this week to put Iran “on notice” and the imposition of new sanctions on Friday, the exile group may find his administration more welcoming than any before.

This is somewhat reminiscent of the exile community from Ukraine (typical of which is Chrystia Freeland, who ardently favors crushing Russia), and the exile community from Syria (who likewise are rabidly anti-Russia, in addition to being anti-Assad) — and all other exile communities that the U.S. aristocracy’s CIA has nurtured, over decades, in order to weaken the leader of any country who is on favorable terms with the leader of Russia. (The CIA is expert at regime-change; they work all the angles.)

The MEK’s agenda is strongly supportive of the long-time U.S. Establishment’s program regarding Iran. For example, the Brookings Institution’s June 2009, 170-page, analysis, “Which Path to Persia?” in which both O’Hanlon and Pollack — along with four others of Brookings’s many rabid neoconservatives — described various strategies to conquer Iran.

Some of the paper’s sections were called, “Persuasion,” “Engagement,” “Military,” etc.; and, for example, “Military” is broken further down into “Invasion,” “Airstrikes,” and “Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike.”

Part III was “Regime Change,” and included, “Supporting a Popular Uprising,” “Supporting Iranian Minority And Opposition Groups,” and “The Coup.”

Trump right now is not so much “Supporting Iranian Minority And Opposition Groups,” as he is: Supported by Iranian Minority and Opposition Groups — such as the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq.

The wikipedia article on the Mujahedeen e-Kalkh includes also the following relevant section:

How did those Mujahedeen (and do you remember that before Al Qaeda was called “Al Qaeda,” it was called the “Mujahedeen” in Afghanistan?) suddenly become so prominent and popular in America’s newsmedia, after having been, for so long, banned as terrorists? In order to understand that (and the aristocracy’s ongoing war against even their own country’s public), one has to understand how the aristocracy works, which is our subject here: it works by financing its agents (including not just the think tanks, but the newsmedia). That’s why it’s now called “the Permanent Government”: it’s agents for the ‘permanent’ aristocracy — which doesn’t change even when its individual members do (such as by births and deaths, and by changes in individual fortunes).

The Brookings report noted (in Chapter 7, “Inspiring an Insurgency”): “The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA ) could take care of most of the supplies and training for these groups, as it has for decades all over the world.” Was Mike Pompeo (Trump’s new CIA Director) listening? Apparently, he was even taking his instructions from them.

The Brookings analysis also said: “The United States should expect to provide an array of assistance to insurgents, depending on their military skill and their degree of popular support. The more competent and popular the insurgents are, the less they would need American aid.”

Gambrell’s article mentioned a RAND report (for which he unfortunately provided neither a name nor a link, nor even a date, but we’ll provide all that below), which included the following passage (from which Gambrell quoted only the last two sentences), which indicated that the MEK and other such proxy-groups would need lots of “American aid” — lots of funding from U.S. taxpayers — in order to stand any chance of ever succeeding:

Prior to establishing an alliance with Saddam, the MeK had been a popular organization. However, once it settled in Iraq and fought against Iranian forces in alliance with Saddam, the group incurred the ire of the Iranian people and, as a result, faced a shortfall in volunteers. Thus began a campaign of disingenuous recruiting. The MeK naturally sought out Iranian dissidents, but it also approached Iranian economic migrants in such countries as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates with false promises of employment, land, aid in applying for asylum in Western countries, and even marriage, to attract them to Iraq. Relatives of members were given free trips to visit the MeK’s camps. Most of these “recruits” were brought into Iraq illegally and then required to hand over their identity documents for “safekeeping.” Thus, they were effectively trapped.

That 2009 RAND report was titled “The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq”, and it had been prepared specifically for the ‘Defense’ Department; so, presumably, Trump’s ‘Defense’ Secretary, Marine General James Mattis, and Trump’s National Security Advisor (until February 13th), Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, both had read it. If they have also read the Brookings paper — which noted “and their degree of popular support. The more competent and popular the insurgents are, the less they would need American aid” — then they’d already have been duly warned that to rely upon such anti-Iran proxies as MEK (people such as Elaine Chou and Rudolf Giuliani and Newt Gingrich are being paid by), would be very dumb, because the more that those proxies (such as MEK) “would need American aid” (on account of those American proxies being increasingly despised by Iranians as their enemies). Proxies are supposed to be used in order to lower the costs — not to raise them. (And, the alternative to using proxies, which is to send in one’s own army, costs taxpayers lots of money, which can’t be kept off the books.) All that’s available to do this job is the proxies; so, the U.S. aristocracy hire them.

Apparently, Trump’s team are being swayed by Islamist Marxist enemies of the post-1979 Iranian regime, and of the pre-1979 Iranian regime, and of America, and who are hated as cheats and liars by many Muslims in countries throughout the world. Now, where would a group like that be getting its money, if not from the CIA and the other agencies of the U.S. aristocracy (and perhaps its allied aristocracies in Europe and the Middle East)? (And note, here, that, though this operation is serving the U.S. aristocracy, it’s being financed by U.S. taxpayers — the people who fund the CIA.)

But, if this is the way that the aristocracy can sucker one of its own dumbest members (Trump), to keeping up their long war, then perhaps the change from Obama to Trump has been merely a messier version of the same thing as before.

Is this the best that today’s America can come up with — dumber neocons?

Are we back, again, to George W. Bush, but just with a different face and name? Is Donald Trump merely a different Presidential cog, in the same old aristocratic machine? It does seem that way. And the deceived American public have overall a high regard for Bush, who destroyed Iraq, just as they have a very high regard for Obama, who destroyed Libya, Syria, and Ukraine.

Even if Donald Trump had been sincere about his intention to “drain the swamp” of the aristocracy and its agents, he’d be needing to outsmart them, and not merely to be just another one of their many suckers.

But where will Trump learn that he’s been fooled? Will he learn it in the New York Times? Will he learn it in the Washington Post? Will he learn it in Fox News? Will he learn it in Breitbart? Will he learn it in National Review? Will he learn it in Mother Jones? Will he learn it in TIME? They’re all (both the ones against him, as well as the ones for him) feeding his fantasies, the U.S. mainstream view, neoconservatism.

Where, among the ‘news’media he might follow, would he be apprised of realities such as you’ve seen documented here? He’s surrounded only by the aristocracy and its agents, who hide these realities.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

Comment

Name:

E-mail:

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

17 Comments

Always was, is and will be until the Hegemon is put on its knees and destroyed forever. And destruction must be from the inside, not direct military confrontation. This should be the Russia’s ultimate foreign policy goal, for the sake of its own existence and for the sake of the planet. The time is comming, at fast pace, either strong and powerful Russia or the Hegemon will prevail. There is simply no place in this world for both. Let’s hope for the best.

The “the greatest threat to peace in the world today” is a class, not a state, neither the USA nor UK, which are abstraqct entities they hold in their grasp, while prosecuting a war against all, which is after all what capitalism is all about.

It will not be a ‘thing’ called the United States that is taken down when US dollar hegemony is replaced with a new Chinese-Zionist fiat currency — a long planned and carefully choreographed move — but all the people holding worthless paper or suddenly vanishing digital assets, including everyone reading this article. I submit to you Eric Zuesse practices the art of misdirection, all of the time, so when you suddenly discover you are penniless and must submit to microchipping in order to eat, don’t say you weren’t warned.

It was big news when Xi visited London in October 2015, but memories are short.

It was the Brits who offered the Chinese the only thing they could to maintain relelvance in the New Unipolar Zionist World Order, i.e. a deal to manage the transition to a new global fiat, using their ‘technical’ expertise with the paper money/fiat scam, the only thing they know, to create a two tiered system where the Zionist power elite + China hold all real money via SDR’s, and you hold easily disappearable local currencies.

And all this in the context of Brexit — and of Big Time Satrap and All Round Zionist Muppet Donald Trump’s long, slow and completely intentional destruction of US prestige — which it itself a setup for the destruction of the US dollar.

All that irrationality, of the Donald, Nikki Haley at the UN or MBS in Saudi Arabia, which seems to have no purpose, actually does.

So when they end the fed the Zionist bankers will simply be jumping to a new currency, which they will have in abundance, while US paper denominated assets, which happened to be the only kind you have, will suddenly become worthless. The Zionists will then have an opportunity to buy up everything they don’t already own for pennies on the dollar.

A very nice trick, don’t you think vot tak? Each time we transition from an old fiat to a new, the same people make a boatload with this con, and the Chinese were only too happy to accept their offer — which is truthfully an offer of stability and an opportunity to make make a boatload of money in the process. Who could resist?

I won’t get too far into the story of the long running relationship between the opium dealing Chinese Triads and the Chinese oligarchy they birthed in cooperation with drug dealing Anglo-American Zionists, a relationship going back almost 2 centuries. Heck, even Mao was a Yalie. Think of the great big laugh Zionists have when they use the double entendre only Nxon could go to China and you think you know what it means.

Lol and lol again!

This sort of reminds me of your prescient recommendations and praise for Tulsi Gabbard just ahead of her vote to punish those dastardly Russians, via H.R. 3364, the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.

You put the cart before the horse, C I eh. By the way, the Chinese invented paper (and guns, and so forth). Maybe you should go writing for Infowars (or the CIA). These Zionist-compromised are always demonizing China and Iran (apart from being – dumber Chump – Trump’s Goebbels). Don’t mention the Zionists, though.

“Read it and weep” is a very common expression used by pindo adolescents. Invariably, of the right wing sort. The independent is zionazi propaganda, and devoutly Russophobic. Thanks for forewarning on what to expect from the rest of your reply, cia, you saved me a few minutes much more productivly employed reading something else. ;-D

Hi Eric, thanks very much for this article and especially for your comments about FDR – that’s very interesting as I have heard of him but not alot about him. there are a couple of things that I don’t completely agree with in your article, which I will mention –

I think that the aristocracy that is ruling the USA – IS – Lockheed Martin and all the other weapons (and medical equipment and space ships) manufacturers – – not that these companies only benefit from the ideology of the aristocracy –

I suppose the Masons – who the aristocracy belongs to – – are against Russia as an ideological thing, but mostly this is about money and materialism – although I have read in several occult type books that the Anglo Americans are trying to stop Russia from becoming the leading nation of the world, set to happen a millennia and a half from now.

What I DON’T find in these ideological / masonic / secret brotherhood writings – is the information about the Zionists – From what I’m reading now it appears that the Zionists are the aristocracy and the owners of the weapons / medical machinery / space travel technology –

So how do the Zionists fit in with the ideology of Russia must be stopped ? that’s the puzzle – I see clearly that the Zionists are in control – there’s no doubt – they own everything – but how does that fit in with the ant-Russia thing ?

Also I don’t agree that Trump is stupid like the last couple of paragraphs indicate – he was smart enough before the election – he was very on the mark and fooled alot of people – fooled because now he is just working for the aristocracy – in fact is one of them – which we all should have seen more clearly –

-Trump isn’t stupid, but he lacks ‘presidential finesse’, and my guess is that he has virtually a gun pointed at his head by the Deep State, possible at his family as well.

-Zionism doesn’t have that much to do with idealism or politics. Its dark goal is submission, and when it can’t be reached total destruction.
I’m aware that this a very simplified summary. To get an overall idea what zionism is about, and its history throughout the ages, I’d suggest to read the book ‘The controversy of Zion’ by Douglas Reed. On the internet you can find a downloadable pdf.
This book is an almost must-read to get a clearer view on global movements, and still very actual while being written in 1957.

So how do the Zionists fit in with the ideology of Russia must be stopped ?

Divide and conquer is their MO, by deed, by law, by nature.
Our history has their fingerprints all over it.
Having the USA isolated and fearful and hateful of Russia is a natural.
The Russians have played host, persecutor, borrower, dependent and victim already.
I can’t imagine how they would allow it to happen again.
The USA is more likely to be the next victim.
One might say is already the next victim.

Zionism is an exclusivist, supremacist, racist, violent and deceitful ideology.
It is, in it’s roots, a perversion of God’s word (or of ancient wisdoms if you prefer).
“The commandments of men” was Jesus Christ’s description of their faith.
Managing to attach their own Torah to the Christian Bible was a masterstroke by some evil bastard.
Does any body know this history?

Just imagine being in control of the worlds money supply for hundreds of years.
Through the rise and fall of empires.
Would you not control the banks, the media, mining and high end manufacturing?
Would you not infiltrate the religious, political and scientific orbits of your host and it’s rivals?
Would you not gain control of the secret agencies?
Would you not make your previous victims the enemies of your new friends?
You might provoke a revolution to get rid of a recalcitrant king.
Or start a world war to unify the tribe.
Maybe start your very own country on the Mediterranean coast on the edge of the worlds greatest oil fields.

It’s all quite natural if you believe you are the chosen ones.

When the next crisis comes, the banks must be nationalised, the Federal Reserve dissolved and a one time wealth tax imposed. But who on earth can make that happen?

old news rehashed. decent article. imho the american aristocracy is feeble-minded and 2nd rate to begin with, therefore vulnerable to subversion, which handles the rest. this is the dynamic played out over the decades.

‘aristocracy’ is a misnomer and slander against the concept. ‘plutocrat’, ‘oligarch’, ‘cryptocrat’, even ‘common criminal’ much more apt.

the ideal of aristocracy is just self-improvement attained; like nietzsche’s formal definition of nobility as that which can change its own nature. in the republican american project, the theory was to foster conditions conducive to generally improving the quality of people, cul-

tivating an (petit nouveau) aristocracy from a broad landed gentry, cottage industrialists (jobs/wozniak, ‘garage’ bands, startups show this was an actively productive ideal at least into the 1970s).

Criminals establish chokeholds, monopolies, or equivalently and even more powerfully, develop and take over a totalitarian state. the bolsheviks have their modern cousins that want to ‘regulate’ google (ie state takeover), whereas a libertarian federal govt would break it up and

free the pieces back into the well-tended classic capitalist market. if true socialism has never been tried, so the same for capitalism. thus far we’ve had mostly syndicates and shadow play. our stock market is the most exorbitant and exalted of fake news.

apropos: deleuze has nietzsche asserting that the base man wants not power but its representation. canonical example from our time is the gangsta rapper persona, which recall has dominated our cultural psyche since basically K.Cobain exited the scene.

the rapper “represents”, but this is just coincidence of token meaning different things. what i’m getting at is the mania to impress, to take on as much of the accoutrements and visually gross (as in not subtle) tokens of power.

it’s got this aggressive and needy mania that his power (?) should be ‘reconized’. it’s all representation of power, but power itself is practically absent. this is how i see this american ‘aristocracy’. gather enough art, put enough fam through yale, sit on some boards: representation. representation. superficial. trappings. facade.

An excellent article. However, I would like to add a few points. It is ironic that the West wants to destroy Russia, and yet it was the West who created it. The Slavs of Russia were unified by Swedish Vikings, whom the Slavs invited to come. They came, with the result that about 40 % of all Russians have Swedish Viking blood (all Russian blonds are of Swedish origin). The actual name of Russia is derived from the Scandinavian word “Rus”, which is still in use. What is incredible is that most people do not know what the name of Russia really means. It means “The Land of the Vikings”. After the arrival of Vikings began Mongol, and after that Western invasions of Russia. What was the difference between Napoleons and Hitlers invasions of Russia ? There was none. Both were financed by international private bankers. Does anybody really believe that Germany had the money to fight two world wars without foreign support ? Ofcourse not. The Russian Revolution of 1917 was financed by Western bankers, who gave Lenin and Trotsky 20 million dollars in gold. The aim was the destruction and plundering of Russia. It was prevented by Lenin’s death due to syphilis and by the fact that Stalin came to power, who concentrated on the Soviet Union first and international communism second. The elites of the West have not given up their dream of destroying and breaking up Russia. As the famous political economist Lyndon LaRouche has stated, the only thing that can save the US dollar is the plunder of Russia, specifically Siberia and the Caspian region. However, the Western elites have bitten more than they can chew. When the Warsaw Pact collapsed in 1989, NATO should have been disbanded then and there, as it represents a tremendous financial drain. It was kept. Worse, the European Union was created, which is nothing more than the civilian component of NATO, acting in conjunction with NATO, as proved in Kiev in 2014. The overall aim was for the EU and NATO to move right next to Russia’s borders, to wait until Russia was destabilized, and then move into the country to establish “law”, “order”, “democracy”, respect for “human rights” and to place Russian nuclear weapons under their control. The country would subsequently, in the name of “democracy”, be broken up so that private bankers and corporations could move in and plunder the country. Well, it did not turn out that way. This empire building process cost a heap of money. The result ? The EU in 2015 started printing 1,1 trillion euros backed by nothing and is currently printing 80 billion a month, backed by nothing. The US is printing at 85-120 billion dollars a month backed by nothing. The US foreign debt is 20 trillion dollars, while analysts are debating what the total domestic debt is. On the other hand, Russia and China have created the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, are preparing to introduce the Eurasian Economic Union, as well as gold backed rubles and yuans. By attempting to destroy Russia, the Western elites have succeeded in destroying themselves financially. The total result is that the Washington political establishment has left the impression of not knowing what it has to do, while Europe is quietly looking towards Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. Proof of this lies in Germany. Merkel might have control over her bankers, but not over the industrialists, who are openly conducting negotiations in Russia. Merkel cannot even form a Government, as nobody wants to go into a coalition with her, fearing future repercussions. Now everybody is watching Washington, waiting to see what it will do, and at the same time fearing it will not do anything foolish.

There’s so many falsehoods in your comment that I don’t really know where to begin…

I will do a B.F and skip the details (see how it works?). Here I’ll just point out the most blatant “fact”, the claimed etymology of “Rus”: In Scandinavian languages, ‘rus/a’ generally means ‘to rush’ even today, but unfortunately Russia and Russians are pronounced Ryssland and Ryssar (i.e. with a Y instead of U). ‘Rys/a” in Scandiavian means ‘to shiver’ and is commonly used in context of expressing fear (insert your favorite explanation of Scandinavians’ eternal horror of the Mighty Mother Bear :) ).

On the contrary, “Rus” means ‘blonde’ in all and every Slavic language on this planet. Russians got their name because of the physiological traits that over time made them different (in appearance) than their southern brethren (e.g. in Central and Southern Europe).

James Schultz, a White House ethics lawyer, has stepped down after spending nearly a year working on financial disclosure issues, according to a report.

He said his resignation had nothing to do with alleged ethics violations of members of the Trump administration, including White House counselor Kellyanne Conway and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser.

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.